Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37130601›Full record

SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2023

Fracture risk reduction and safety by osteoporosis treatment compared with placebo or active comparator in postmenopausal women: systematic review, network meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis of randomised clinical trials.

Mina Nicole Händel, Isabel Cardoso, Cecilie von Bülow, Jeanett Friis Rohde, Anja Ussing, Sabrina Mai Nielsen, Robin Christensen, Jean-Jacques Body, Maria Luisa Brandi, Adolfo Diez-Perez and 12 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 113 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
113citing papers in PubMed, 12 pooled it
44.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

113 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 180 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Brazilian Guideline on Menopausal Cardiovascular Health - 2024.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2024
    Guideline
  11. Denosumab vs. bisphosphonates in primary osteoporosis: a meta-analysis of comparative safety in randomized controlled trials.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2024
    Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Trial
  14. Effectiveness of treatment initiation for secondary fracture prevention in the older population: Japanese Bone-fracture Osteoporosis in Late-stage population Database study (J-BOLD) - emulation of a randomized target trial.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025
    Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Romosozumab followed by denosumab versus denosumab only: a post hoc analysis of FRAME and FRAME extension.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2024
    Trial
  18. Review
  19. Modern pharmacological management of Osteoporosis: from monotherapy to sequential and combination approaches in postmenopausal women.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026
    Review
  20. Review

53 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

22 authors at 13 institutions in 9 countries.

Mina Nicole HändelParker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-8256-8756
Isabel CardosoParker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark.
Cecilie von BülowParker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark.
Jeanett Friis RohdeParker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark.
Anja UssingParker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark.
Sabrina Mai NielsenParker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark.
Robin ChristensenParker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark.
Jean-Jacques BodyDepartment of Medicine, CHU Brugmann, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Maria Luisa BrandiFirmoLab, FIRMO Foundation, Florence, Italy.
Adolfo Diez-PerezDepartment of Internal Medicine, Institut Hospital del Mar of Medical Investigation, Autonomous University of Barcelona and CIBERFES (Frailty and Healthy Aging Research Network), Instituto Carlos III, Barcelona, Spain.
Peyman HadjiFrankfurt Centre of Bone Health, Frankfurt and Philipps-University of Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Muhammad Kassim JavaidNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology, and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Willem Frederik LemsWF Lems Department of Rheumatology, Amsterdam UMC, VUmc, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Xavier NoguesIMIM (Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute), Parc de Salut Mar, Pompeu Fabra University, Barcelona, Spain.
Christian RouxINSERM U 1153, Hospital Paris-Centre, University of Paris, Paris, France.
Salvatore MinisolaDepartment of Clinical, Internal, Anaesthesiologic, and Cardiovascular Sciences, Rome University, Rome, Italy.
Andreas KurthDepartment of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Marienhaus Klinikum Mainz, Major Teaching Hospital, University Medicine Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Thierry ThomasUniversité Jean Monnet Saint-Étienne, CHU de Saint-Etienne, Rheumatology Department, INSERM U1059, F-42023, Saint-Etienne, France.
Daniel Prieto-AlhambraNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology, and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Serge Livio FerrariDivision of Bone Diseases, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland.
Bente LangdahlDepartments of Clinical Medicine and of Endocrinology and Internal Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Bo AbrahamsenDepartment of Clinical Research, Odense Patient Data Explorative Network, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
University of Southern Denmark · DKFrederiksberg Hospital · DKInserm · FRNuffield Orthopaedic Centre · GBAarhus University · DKAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLFondazione FADOI · ITJohannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DEPhilipps University of Marburg · DEUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona · ESUniversitat Pompeu Fabra · ESUniversité Libre de Bruxelles · BEUniversity Hospital of Geneva · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo review the comparative effectiveness of osteoporosis treatments, including the bone anabolic agents, abaloparatide and romosozumab, on reducing the risk of fractures in postmenopausal women, and to characterise the effect of antiosteoporosis drug treatments on the risk of fractures according to baseline risk factors.

designSystematic review, network meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis of randomised clinical trials. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library to identify randomised controlled trials published between 1 January 1996 and 24 November 2021 that examined the effect of bisphosphonates, denosumab, selective oestrogen receptor modulators, parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, and romosozumab compared with placebo or active comparator. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Randomised controlled trials that included non-Asian postmenopausal women with no restriction on age, when interventions looked at bone quality in a broad perspective. The primary outcome was clinical fractures. Secondary outcomes were vertebral, non-vertebral, hip, and major osteoporotic fractures, all cause mortality, adverse events, and serious cardiovascular adverse events.

resultsThe results were based on 69 trials (>80 000 patients). For clinical fractures, synthesis of the results showed a protective effect of bisphosphonates, parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, and romosozumab compared with placebo. Compared with parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, bisphosphonates were less effective in reducing clinical fractures (odds ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.12 to 2.00). Compared with parathyroid hormone receptor agonists and romosozumab, denosumab was less effective in reducing clinical fractures (odds ratio 1.85, 1.18 to 2.92 for denosumab

conclusionsThe evidence indicated a benefit of a range of treatments for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women for clinical and vertebral fractures. Bone anabolic treatments were more effective than bisphosphonates in the prevention of clinical and vertebral fractures, irrespective of baseline risk indicators. Hence this analysis provided no clinical evidence for restricting the use of anabolic treatment to patients with a very high risk of fractures. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019128391.

Indexed as

Bone Density Conservation AgentsOsteoporosisOsteoporosis, PostmenopausalOsteoporotic FracturesSpinal FracturesDenosumabDiphosphonatesFemaleHumansPostmenopauseRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicReceptor, Parathyroid Hormone, Type 1Risk Reduction BehaviorBone Density Conservation AgentsDenosumabDiphosphonatesReceptor, Parathyroid Hormone, Type 1

Identifiers

PMID37130601
PMCPMC10152340
OpenAlexW4367681339

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.